Would Plush have won if the new rules had been applied?

[Joesitz]

There is no history that I know of how the Base Values of Jumps were arrived at. I do not see why a quad salchow takes a back seat to a quad loop. Taking off or even plain skating on a back inside edge is universally more difficult than skating on a back outside edge.

The Toe Walley, which of course does not appear on the List. I would assume it is because of its difficult back inside edge take off, yet one gets more credit for a back outside edge Lutz jump.

I guess the serious fan just has to accept that the Base Values are calculated at .4 and .5 differences in the order laid out by the drafters of the Scales of Values. One doesn't have to accept the SoVs as accurate, but there is no hope of changing them.

[gmyers]

Can you explain, then, how the point totals are accumulated in such a way to render it's elimination? Because the quad was worth the same in the 2006/07 season as it was in the 07/08 season, and the top five men at worlds 2007 all landed fully rotated quads (Joubert, Takahashi, Lambiel, Verner, Lysacek). What change in the system happened that could conceivably be responsible for it's decline? Does anyone know?

All I know is that during the 2007-2008 season the world champion didn't do a quad and since then no world or olympic champion has done one.

[Mathman]

One doesn't have to accept the SoVs as accurate, but there is no hope of changing them.

I wouldn't exactly say no hope. For next season the base value of a double Axel will be lowered, a triple toe raised, a triple Salchow lowered, a triple loop raised, a triple flip lowered, a triple Axel raised, a quad toe raised, and a quad Salchow raised.

Only one jump stayed the same, the triple Lutz.

Still no separate base value for jumps like a single toe Wally or inside Axel. I think the idea is that no-one can do triples of these jumps anyway, so their use is limited to connecting steps. If they gave a base value to a toe Wally, a skater would have to use up one of his jumping passes on a jump that he would at best be a double.

[ImaginaryPogue]

All I know is that during the 2007-2008 season the world champion didn't do a quad and since then no world or olympic champion has done one.

Exactly. So the question is what changed? Did the system change? The quad value stayed the same. The triple axel went from 7.5 to 8.2, but in the 08/09 season (Lysacek WC). Were there any other changes that might have effected the value of the quad (not base value, general value). If so, then yeah, you can argue that the system did hurt the quad.

[museksk8r]

All I know is that during the 2007-2008 season the world champion didn't do a quad and since then no world or olympic champion has done one.

Well, Takahashi did attempt a 4flip in his Worlds LP this season when he won. He was close, but no cigar. It's not like he didn't attempt one at all like Buttle and Lysacek though.

[janetfan]

Well, Takahashi did attempt a 4flip in his Worlds LP this season when he won. He was close, but no cigar. It's not like he didn't attempt one at all like Buttle and Lysacek though.

Would the majority of fans rather see a skater fall down on a quad or land a clean 3A?

I guess it depends on our individual preferences.
I would rather watch a clean Buttle or Chan than a clean Joubert or Plushy.

Others feel differently. I think it is good for skating that we have some wonderful artistic skaters as well as some big jumpers. To be fair, they all perform a variery of jumps and all have their own brand of artistry.

I am a fan of Dai's skating whether he does a quad or not. I do like most skaters better when they don't fall down. Maybe others prefer the thrill of a splat but not me.

[Olympia]

Obviously, one hopes that skaters who have reached a certain level can exhibit proficiency in jumps and other elements of skating. But I take that for granted in a world-class competition. At that point, I don't really count jumps. I look at the overall effect. That's why, like Janetfan, I love Takahashi whether he does a quad or not, and in fact I love Takahashi whether he wins or not. He's still Takahashi, and his skating is unequaled, whether someone else beats him on that particular day. It's probably why I don't think much about whether Plushenko would have won the Olympics with another set of numbers grading his jumps.

[gmyers]

Exactly. So the question is what changed? Did the system change? The quad value stayed the same. The triple axel went from 7.5 to 8.2, but in the 08/09 season (Lysacek WC). Were there any other changes that might have effected the value of the quad (not base value, general value). If so, then yeah, you can argue that the system did hurt the quad.

Maybe that change in the triple axel was enough-because if you add the bonus and a double toe after the halfway point -you get a quad equal value.

Well, Takahashi did attempt a 4flip in his Worlds LP this season when he won. He was close, but no cigar. It's not like he didn't attempt one at all like Buttle and Lysacek though.

I did see that he got 4F< which was better than 3F and maybe the new rules it would have been 4F with negative GOE but it would have meant more for skating as a whole if it was 4F with plus GOE. I mean an Olympic season with no winner of a major event doing any kind of quad?

[ImaginaryPogue]

In 2007, a quad was worth nine points. A 3A+2T after the second half would've been worth 9.68, so it's always been worth more.

[dorispulaski]

Still no separate base value for jumps like a single toe Wally or inside Axel. I think the idea is that no-one can do triples of these jumps anyway, so their use is limited to connecting steps. If they gave a base value to a toe Wally, a skater would have to use up one of his jumping passes on a jump that he would at best be a double.

That would be a triple wally, not a triple toe wally, that no one has ever done . Elaine Zayak used to do a triple toe wally, and lots of other skaters have done it too. The triple toe wally is graded under COP as a triple toe loop, and that's been how it is since the Zayak Rule was created.

[Mathman]

I don't think Elaine Zayak ever did a true toe Walley (I kooked up the spelling ), in the sense of taking off from an inside edge. As I understand it. many people call a toe loop a toe Walley if it uses the "Walley entrance" of a forward outside three-turn followed by a little hop. Others frown on this usage.

Now that I am reminded, I think gkelly did once post a video of a skater actually attempting an true inside edge triple toe Walley. It was definitely a rarity, though.

Maybe some of our technical experts can comment?

[annamac]

What happened to cause the decline of the quad? I think it was 3 factors coming together:

1) In 2008 Jeff Buttle was the first skater in a decade to win the world title without a quad. Until that point I don't think anybody thought it was possible - in theory, yes, because the CoP allowed it, but not in reality. When skaters with shaky quads or no quads at all saw that they realized that they had a chance, if they tailored their programs right - especially if the quadmasters made a mistake (as was the case in 2008 Worlds).

2) After that the SoV was reworked a little, and the value of the quads and 3A was raised a bit - but so did the penalty. The GoE on a bad quad was enough to render the jump worthless unless you were sure you could land it with positive GoE. The points for a fall on an underrotated quad were ZERO - as if you attempted nothing, while you could score 1.5 points for a nice 2T, so why bother?

3) At the same time, several prominent quadmasters retired/sat out 2009 - Lambiel retired (then came back), Takahashi took a year off for health reasons. That basically left out Joubert and Verner, neither of which had a particulary consistent season. Again - why bother with something risky when you can skate safe and trust the quadmaster to make at least one mistake, which would be enough to win.

But this thread carried itself into Vancouver, where Lysacek, who no one will "accuse" of being the most artistic skater (the "Yagudin" of the match), won without a quad against the old master Plushenko (not quite the "Goeble" of the match), who landed a 4-3 and made no "visible" mistakes - I mean his landings weren't as good, but he did not fall and I think not even a stepout (it's not as if I want to see either program again to check). This caused a lot of peple to say "Huh?" and the ISU to take a step back and reconsider.

Would Plushy have won under the new rules and SoV? Yes, by a narrow margin (about the same as Lysacek's narrow margin). As many people would have been happy with that as with Lysacek's win (maybe they would be from other parts of the world). It was a close competition, anyway.

A more interesting question would be - would Joubert have won against either Takahashi or Chan in Torino, where he landed two quads (neither perfect)? Remember, Joubert landed 2 quads and 5 triples, fell on his 6th triple, while Chan landed 7 triples and fell on his 8th. Which is better? Well, I ran the numbers, and while Joubert would have received a lot more points that he actualy did in Torino, Takahashi and Chan would also have benefitted from the new combo bonus and Dai would receive the new base value for his underrotated 4F, so the order would have remained the same, although the result would be much closer. Are you satisfied with that?

Anna

[Joesitz]

I wouldn't exactly say no hope. For next season the base value of a double Axel will be lowered, a triple toe raised, a triple Salchow lowered, a triple loop raised, a triple flip lowered, a triple Axel raised, a quad toe raised, and a quad Salchow raised.

Only one jump stayed the same, the triple Lutz.

Still no separate base value for jumps like a single toe Wally or inside Axel. I think the idea is that no-one can do triples of these jumps anyway, so their use is limited to connecting steps. If they gave a base value to a toe Wally, a skater would have to use up one of his jumping passes on a jump that he would at best be a double.

Even with the changes, the Loop Jump still gets more value than the Salchow. What a Tech Panelist should be looking for is a defined back inside take off of the salchow and flip. If you look closesly many skaters take off on the Flat of the blade. But then again, any which way take offs have never been considered an error. Technique is only considered for the air rotations and the landings on all Jumps.

No one is stopping a skater from executing a Tripple Walley. It's not so much about using a jump pass as it is about base values. There are no BVS for any kind of Walley. The single Walley could be used for the PC scores, I would imagine.

[Olympia]

Quote: "It's not as if I want to see either program again to check."

Cute one, Annamac! It's true that neither program was an artistic accomplishment for the ages, though Lysacek's was far more meticulous, and of course compliant with the CoP rules of its time. Keep in mind that if the rules had been different, Lysacek and Carroll would have crafted a program to those rules--possibly without a quad, but racking up the points in some other manner--while Plushenko would have been equally dismissive of the requirements for moves in the field, jumps executed throughout the program and so on.

I would love to see Lambiel's short program again, though! And Takahashi's long.

[Joesitz]

I don't think Elaine Zayak ever did a true toe Walley (I kooked up the spelling ), in the sense of taking off from an inside edge. As I understand it. many people call a toe loop a toe Walley if it uses the "Walley entrance" of a forward outside three-turn followed by a little hop. Others frown on this usage.

Now that I am reminded, I think gkelly did once post a video of a skater actually attempting an true inside edge triple toe Walley. It was definitely a rarity, though.

Maybe some of our technical experts can comment?

I presume the ICJ does not want its Skaters to be in danger of the difficulties in executing Triple Walleys, any more than executing Triple Toeless Lutzes.

They are extremely difficult, and could cause grave harm even during practice. So no credit/no Sov.